Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV Telegram channel! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Adobe Premiere Pro CC and other CC Suite 2017 products
  • 387 Replies sorted by
  • Apparently BlackMagic DNGs are not showing up with the pink cast: http://forums.adobe.com/message/5805819?tstart=0

  • From the P-Pro & Speedgrade boards over at Adobe, there are several folks having issues with cinema DNG's, and from the answers ... there's a flavor or two of them that the Adobe software simply doesn't "read" period ... and others that for certain people and if the moon's in the right phase and they've thrown salt over the proper place on a Tuesday the 14th ... are usable. And a couple that people have had no issue with.

    For that middle group ... I think perhaps that is a typical problem with a new major product change. Give them a month and seen how it does.

    Um ... if you're in that group, I don't expect you to be thrilled with a wait, you know?

    Neil

  • There's a major change in the basic approach to working the Adobe cine/vid "paradigm" with the new release. It's got some WAY cool handiness, but ... you've got to think it through a bit.

    For example ... think of P-Pro as the "main" software, and use the other things such as SpeedGrade and AfterEffects as ... essentially ... plug-ins for P-Pro. You're going to do some grading? You might want to add an adjustment layer or two to your timeline in P-Pro before sending the project to Sg ... as you can add layers to your footage for grading each separate clip, BUT ... you can't add ANYTHING to the timeline ... such as an "old-style" grading layer.

    Once you know how to work the new way, it's pretty fast and slick ... but at first, there's quite a few things that feel like it's broken, and you just can't get there from here.

    Yes, you can ... but ... you need to re-think how to do it. And going out for short bits to Sg or AE ... rather than say finishing the whole thing, then taking the whole project one time to Sg, then exporting back to P-Pro, re-working your transitions, then exporting the whole thing to AE ... that's an old and slow paradigm.

    Once you do start going forth & back regularly ... it's pretty damn quick ... AND ... wow ... rendering out a project is several times faster now. A project that took on average an hour & forty-five minutes now renders in around twelve, on the same computer.

    Neil

  • @rNeil That's good to hear. Have a project about to go into editing, and editor likes to grade while editing instead of waiting until the edit is locked, so that should work out well for us.

  • Matt, I haven't checked this out, but ... perhaps a quick trial might be wise before working the main project. I'll be working this through later in the day if I can get to it, but thought I'd pass it on.

    Someone over on the Adobe boards just noted that when he started in P-Pro, went to Speedgrade to grade, then back to P-Pro, then to AfterEffects ... the Lumetri stuff from Sg appeared to be disabled or something in AE, so he "lost" a lot of his color work.

    A response was that the "typical" workflow is that one edits, then adds effects, then grades, so what's the problem? Well ... if one does the titles et al in AE AFTER grading the main project ... yea, that would be normal, right? So ... you might do a quick mini-project first testing out the 'flow' to make sure you don't hit a glitch.

    Other than that, and having to re-think the process as my brain STILL wants to think of Sg as a completely separate program/process ... it really works quite well, very fast really. Neil

  • Better response as to working through P-Pro/Sg/Ae process from Dave Merchant over at the Adobe P-Pro forum. Yea, it's gonna be a bit different that I've done, as the grading stuff you do in Sg (if in the "Lumetri" tool) doesn't pass through to Ae yet.

    "You can open a Pr sequence that contains AE linked comps in Speegrade and they will display the same as any other clip, so you can grade afterwards (which is the intended workflow). If you have AE text layers, lower thirds, etc. that need to be excluded from the grade, then you would create them separately (as a new layer in Premiere Pro) and grade only the underlying footage, that's how it's always been done.

    If you want to convert part of a sequence into an AE comp after grading, then you have two options:

    1) Apply the Lumetri effect to an adjustment layer and exclude that track when you send to AE. Of course the grade won't show in AE, but it will remain editable through Dynamic Link.

    2) If you want to pass an Sg grade into an AE comp, you have to save it as a .look file then use the "Apply Color LUT" effect in AE rather than the Lumetri effect in Pr."

  • Video about new features:

  • @rNeil Thanks for this great info. Yeah I was thinking same to do test mini project for workflow. Looking forward to trying it all out.

  • Matt,

    Mostly it works great, though there's a couple things to remember. Actually, it's pretty fantastic as far as time-saving goes ... but ... :

    Going from P-Pro to Speedgrade through the Dynamic-Link thing is marvy, NO render-out time, import re-linking, that sort of thing. Many of the tools (including ALL timeline controls) are NOT available in Sg with this process. So, if you want to have grading layers separate from your editing layers, you need to make those in P-Pro before going over to Sg. I still forget that occasionally ... and it takes a couple minutes to close out of Sg/reload P-Pro and make a new timeline layer for the area to grade. Big whoop.

    It's the P-Pro/Ae trip that's a bit more problematical, but manageable. It seems that though P-Pro has "Lumetri" built into it now, so it can see anything done in Sg, for some silly reason ... Ae doesn't. So simply going to Ae with the project means you are doing titling/fx over the 'raw' footage, not your graded look. You've two choices to deal with this:

    1) Back in Sg, make a look or LUT of your grade, saving it ... and then over in Ae, go to the Apply Lut's option and choose/apply that specific LUT. Not really the best way ...

    2) Rather than "sending" the project to Ae from P-Pro over the same path as you sent it to Sg, instead ... open Ae, use the "Dynamic Link" feature to bring the P-Pro project into Ae that way. Weird, but ... it "works". And it's a heck of a lot better than it was prior to this upgrade.

    Neil

  • @rNeil Awesome info - thanks so much.

  • I take so much outa here, it's nice to give some tidbit back ...

    Neil

  • Nice feature. It doesn't sync the audio, just the audio waveforms, but still very handy, then you can bump it on or two frames forward or backwards, or leave it where it is, to get the true sync, or trim the audio.

  • The only problem I have with speed-grade is that for some reason it results in a very low-quality 2.5k RAW image when compared to de-bayering through After Effects. The 2.5k BMCC footage has significantly more moire and noise, on most details, with Speedgrade. After Effects RAW processing looks AMAZINGLY clean in the end, plus, the RAW control parameters are much better. Really wish Speedgrade was just a video-version of Lightroom. Hopefully they'll just combine them eventually.

    To sum it up... I get about 1 billion times better results with the Photoshop/Lightroom RAW tools, than with Speedgrade.

  • @bwhitz

    Really wish Speedgrade was just a video-version of Lightroom

    And I wish you worked at adobe ;-)

  • @maxr

    It'll happen soon. I am sure.

    As soon as video raw capability will become same standard feature as photo raw you'll find that raw software will get standard input and output capability becoming just part of workflow.

  • @Vitaliy_Kiselev
    May the soft dealers listen your predictions; then we could export (as is available right now in Darktable) 32bit single frames from raw footage into a living room size mega nuke machine with just one button which read "press for beyond awesomeness render orgazm" then we could go on holidays for 3 or 4 months and eventually meet PV members in some nice place nice like Vladivostok which by then would be a 32º C all year and a drug legalised paradise. Ahhhh, wouldn't be nice...

    Ok, I have to go back at today's long AE render of stupid triangles, cheers =)

  • @maxr

    LOL. It is hardly predictions as things are moving fast. Hope they'll do it before major economic fuckup.

    I think that we'll have something ala VST interface in audio. So you could set chain of things.

  • @Vitaliy_Kiselev

    You know, it feels that for quite a long time man was limited by his tools and, by experimentation most of the times, persevered in making better ones so to be able to express, to draw a clearer image... and lately my "impression" is of being media itself what is limiting men... losing sight of the "real" goal... which, if you ask me is understanding how be at peace with being alive.
    I guess that's a bit off topic and esoteric, je je

    Anyway, meanwhile in that move to (meta) perfection the boys and girls at Adobe inc could actually put some love into speedgraVe and start working in the VST thing =)

  • @maxr Agreed. Tool almost irrelevant. What matters is emotion/passion/story/conflict/what characters do. We all love great tools but an SD cam, basic mic, and basic editor like windows movie maker is truly all needed to make great movie. Lesson for all - a reminder of what we all know but forgot.

  • @matt_gh2

    What matters is emotion/passion/story/conflict/what characters do.

    No, it matter how big your camera appears on set. You can only make a serious story if you have a big matte-box and fallow focus. Actors will only give good performances if they think your camera looks "pro" enough. :)

  • It was interesting to see the "bts" sequences on the shooting of several of the Harry Potter movies. Some was dolllied, a LOT had multiple angles of dudes with steady-cams held out with both arms, another dude running near with each with an evf/monitor and focus-controls, and several dudes holding LONG mic booms ... as in, 30 feet (10 meter) mic booms.

    And ... off behind everything ... about 10-15 people working around MASSIVE rolling carts of recording/processing machines. With 10-meter tall green screens behind the set section running maybe 50 meters long. Yea, I think that was enough gear to be serious ... :)

    Neil

  • re raw standard--has to happen sometime--you might also see something like "channel raw", where you have for example Kelvin range of 2600-3400. Most raw is wasted space.

  • Yea, I do like the "light-RAW" idea. Maybe 12-bit still... ISO range of +-200 and Kelvin of 2600-3400.